Author
Topic: Tonnika Sisters coming? (Read 18436 times)

I still look at Lucasfilm as a financial juggernaught though. If they think it'll sell (risque or otherwise), they'll push it). Again, Ay Vida has, for all intents and purposes, a string bikini-ish thing on... Even sculpted nipples, or some kind of point to her chesticle region... She's not hurting for aesthetic appeal as far as sculpt goes.

I think the obscure "star whores" reference was never really a thought then... If Ay can pass through the cracks of Hasbro and Lucasfilm, then the Tonika sisters could've as well I believe. That's just my take on it though... I'm sure someone at Hasbro and LFL Licensing are both aware of the impromptu namesake given those 2, but I agree with Matt that it's a "fanboy" factoid only, not really so much a factor in the figure's decision-making process. I think that's been just a silly licensing issue, as has always been claimed.

Hopefully it's hashed out and the figure(s) are finalized. They, behind Hem Dazon, are among the tops in the Cantina requests at this point. Be nice if they were made finally.

Sorry, but I think the whole hookers angle is rather silly too. Hasbro's said for years it's just a licensing issue with the actresses. I'm sure if there was a problem with the characters they portray in the films, they would've mentioned that at some point, since it wouldn't be all that big of a deal to address a topic of that nature to a lot of adult collectors to appease them.

I'm just glad that a Tonikka sister is finally coming. Hopefully Hasbro surprises us and goes ahead and makes them both, or offers them up like the blue and red royal guards with one of each version. If not, my feeble customizing skills will manage.

So if Hem's coming too now, I want to see Givins and Bom Vimdin make it next!

Sorry, but I think the whole hookers angle is rather silly too. Hasbro's said for years it's just a licensing issue with the actresses. I'm sure if there was a problem with the characters they portray in the films, they would've mentioned that at some point, since it wouldn't be all that big of a deal to address a topic of that nature to a lot of adult collectors to appease them.

Hmm, let's do the math...

Major toy company makes figures of prostitutes + Figures of prostitutes have bio on cardback / Character bio finds it's way into the media = Public Relations Disaster

It's entirely possible that Hasbro and/or Lucasfilm have been dodging the issue over the years using the licensing issue to mask the fact that they don't want to make figures of two Mos Eisly prostitutes. Seriously, this could be a big PR issue for the two companies that they might be all too happy to avoid. That may be why we've been getting the licensing excuse all these years.

Tonnika SistersThe Tonnika twins weren't exactly twins. Their production nickname was "Space Girls," though their fashion sense of wearing their underwear on the outside led to a less-than flattering (and somewhat unprintable) nickname. They were played by two local extras that were not related, and did not look alike at all.

But in 1989, when Galaxy Guide 1: A New Hope filled in this pair's backstory, it established that the girls were identical. The artwork accompanying the article was cheated -- it was based on production photography of the cantina extras, but only one of the girls was illustrated. The artwork was reversed and duplicated, creating a mirror image.

This presented a problem when it came using photography of these extras. They clearly weren't identical, despite what their backstory claimed. Timothy Zahn resolved this discrepancy with his short story in the Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina anthology.

In "Hammertong," Zahn reveals that the non-identical girls in the cantina that day weren't the real Tonnika sisters. The real twins were doing time in some prison for one of their many capers. The women posing as them were actually undercover Mistryl shadow warriors.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don't think their "official" backstory is being whores. I think there is some merit to your reasoning though Nick, Hasbro has pretty much always said they want to do them but they can't. Who's stopping them...not themselves. It has to be LFL and we were fed the likeness rights stuff, which I don't believe. Maybe it was true and this latest stuff will resolve that but it just seems fishy that it didn't happen until now and the Hasbro and/or LFL didn't pursue the issue until now. There had to be something beyond the likeness rights thing for them to balk this long

I still think the fact that they haven't gotten figures yet is tied to the fact that they are female characters in lousy outfits with little to no screen time. They've got ugly 50s hair-dos, tacky outfits, and their undies out the outside like superheroes!

Image this, licensing that. Bah! It all comes down to "peg-warmer" status. If they made them, I'd buy them in a heartbeat of course - they're Cantina figures! Outside of us die-hard ANH-loving collector dudes, who else on earth would want figures of girls from the 70s?

Putting all the rumor and back-story history aside, I still think that their feared peg-warming status has more to do with it than anything else...

Who knows? You could be correct. Enough demand has been built up now so Hasbro may feel comfortable putting them out there in some format.

I can see Yarna (that 6 breasted dancer) having an issue being made in regard to "whore" status. Or just the fact there are 6 breast. However, if they are putting out a chopped up and burned Anakin figure the Yarna fig may get made someday. Although it does have pegwarmer status written all over it as well.

I think that's going a tad overboard there. Their bios are already as much in the media as they're ever going to be at this point, around the various sites online. I don't think CNN or local news will be running breaking news stories on a hooker figure developed by Hasbro for their Star Wars action figure line.

Not gonna happen. Way over dramatic there, Nick. ****, they already made a figure of a drug dealer (Elan), you think that's any better than a couple supposed hookers? They made a couple of "sex slave" figures too, in Oola and Slave Leia. Again, no biggie. Nobody cares that they're possibly hookers. It was just a silly rhyming nickname ("Star whores") made up by the filming crew. If the Tonnika sister's bios have been up on StarWars.com for some time now, and are in the reference books and other EU stuff, where Lucasfilm knows kids are already viewing and reading, then this is a completely moot point. If they're not concerned about that, then they're not concerned about this issue in regards to their figure(s). Think about it.

On another note, unless you started working for Hasbro Star Wars marketing, have the ear of Randy Shoemaker and Darryl DePriest, or have a direct line to their PR flack, I think you can stop with the definitive statements.

Tonnika SistersThe Tonnika twins weren't exactly twins. Their production nickname was "Space Girls," though their fashion sense of wearing their underwear on the outside led to a less-than flattering (and somewhat unprintable) nickname. They were played by two local extras that were not related, and did not look alike at all.

But in 1989, when Galaxy Guide 1: A New Hope filled in this pair's backstory, it established that the girls were identical. The artwork accompanying the article was cheated -- it was based on production photography of the cantina extras, but only one of the girls was illustrated. The artwork was reversed and duplicated, creating a mirror image.

This presented a problem when it came using photography of these extras. They clearly weren't identical, despite what their backstory claimed. Timothy Zahn resolved this discrepancy with his short story in the Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina anthology.

In "Hammertong," Zahn reveals that the non-identical girls in the cantina that day weren't the real Tonnika sisters. The real twins were doing time in some prison for one of their many capers. The women posing as them were actually undercover Mistryl shadow warriors.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don't think their "official" backstory is being whores. I think there is some merit to your reasoning though Nick, Hasbro has pretty much always said they want to do them but they can't. Who's stopping them...not themselves. It has to be LFL and we were fed the likeness rights stuff, which I don't believe. Maybe it was true and this latest stuff will resolve that but it just seems fishy that it didn't happen until now and the Hasbro and/or LFL didn't pursue the issue until now. There had to be something beyond the likeness rights thing for them to balk this long

Nobody knows **** as to why its taken this long, we should all be glad that at least one sister is coming and thereby crossing another figure off many of our To-Do Lists

On another note, unless you started working for Hasbro Star Wars marketing, have the ear of Randy Shoemaker and Darryl DePriest, or have a direct line to their PR flack, I think you can stop with the definitive statements.

You lost me there. Who/what was that in reference to?

My response was just refuting your near-definitive statements that it was because they were possibly prostitutes.

Like I said, Hasbro's made figures of drug dealers and sex slaves, so why would they suddenly have a problem with a couple characters that a 1976 film crew jokingly referred to as "Space Whores"? Plus, the Tonikka Sisters bio is all over the place already, for kids to read and enjoy at their leisure, online or in bookstores, wherever. Why would Lucas licensing have a problem with an action figure, but not have a problem with kids reading about the same characters on StarWars.com? Like your math equation above... It doesn't add up.

I'm not saying there couldn't be other issues involved besides the likeness rights though. Sure there could be. But I don't think that the old "Space Whores" nickname is one of them, and I don't think it's going to be a "Public Relations Disaster" for Hasbro to produce this figure either. Never heard a peep about Elan, Slave Leia, Ayy Vida, or any other questionable figures for that matter...

Guys, can we just let this go, nobody knows the real reason why they didn't make this until now and we can all speculate til the cows come home. Again, be glad that at least one is coming and leave it at that!